Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 Vaktathi wrote:

 Orock wrote:
I can just see the LVO rules next year.

Codex: Eldar banned.

GW seems to be repeating a lot of mistakes from the past with this codex.

Free weapons/models with X formation, much like the much bemoaned free Aspiring Champs in the 3.5E codex.

And an Eldar books that looks to be strongly reminiscent of the issues with the 2E Eldar codex and 7E Daemon book that resulted in massive edition changes to fix with 3E 40k reboot and 8E WHFB respectively.

yeah, well they never really learn.

Thus far, if heavy weapons were 1 per 3 jetbikes I am not seeing anything totally game breaking yet. Ranged strength D could be ok, if there is a cost, limits on how many, and limited range. The problem is when you pair ranged strD with superb and cheap anti light armor and infantry with great range.


I have hopes that the real codex says 1 per 3 or that they can errata it. My hopes will be dashed, but I stopped playing competitively when DE got nerfed in 7th anyway.

It doesn't.

1110 points of shoota boys puts out 135 shoota boyz and 15 big shoota boyz that's 270 s4 shots and 45 str5 shots.

Our dice will blot out the sun and destroy the planet in nukleer winter.

 Rismonite wrote:
1110 points of shoota boys puts out 135 shoota boyz and 15 big shoota boyz that's 270 s4 shots and 45 str5 shots.

Our dice will blot out the sun and destroy the planet in nukleer winter.

Aaaannd the effective range of those shoota boys? (24" plus 6" move, 30")

And the expected life expectancy when they get shot at by 160 S6 shots from outside that effective range? (120 hits, 100 wounds, 83 Dead after 5+ cover from 12" move + 36" shooting away)

Case closed.

 Talys wrote:

 PandaHero wrote:

There is no good way to hide 40 bikes, man. They gotta go somewhere.

Again, you don't need to hide them. You need to make a large enough footprint to control where the Pod are dropping, hence reducing the alpha stike. with good spacing, you just screw a pod list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
space your bike, control the pod drop, and then fly away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and, you DONT need 30-40 bike. I think min squad that total up 20-25 bikes are going to be the sweet spot

But, 20 bikes is not spam IMO. The premise of this thread is 810 points in bikes, which, in my opinion is not a winning formula.

those 20 bikes at 405 pts out shot and outrange most of my army.

Even if they are in range first turn, which would be silly.

270 shots. 90 Hit. 45 Wound. 15 Dead Bikes from Shootas.
45 Shots. 15 Hit. 10 Wound. 3 Dead from Big Shootas.

18 Dead bikes.

Bikes move back 12", shoot 36. ~37 Boys die to return fire and the bikes jump out of range in the assault phase. Now they just keep out of your range for the rest of the game. Since they outrange you by 12".

Makumba wrote:

 Talys wrote:

 PandaHero wrote:

There is no good way to hide 40 bikes, man. They gotta go somewhere.

Again, you don't need to hide them. You need to make a large enough footprint to control where the Pod are dropping, hence reducing the alpha stike. with good spacing, you just screw a pod list.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
space your bike, control the pod drop, and then fly away.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Oh and, you DONT need 30-40 bike. I think min squad that total up 20-25 bikes are going to be the sweet spot

But, 20 bikes is not spam IMO. The premise of this thread is 810 points in bikes, which, in my opinion is not a winning formula.

those 20 bikes at 405 pts out shot and outrange most of my army.

Those 20 bikes can outshooot and outrange most Tau.

 pretre wrote:
Even if they are in range first turn, which would be silly.

270 shots. 90 Hit. 45 Wound. 15 Dead Bikes from Shootas.
45 Shots. 15 Hit. 10 Wound. 3 Dead from Big Shootas.

18 Dead bikes.

Bikes move back 12", shoot 36. ~37 Boys die to return fire and the bikes jump out of range in the assault phase. Now they just keep out of your range for the rest of the game. Since they outrange you by 12".

It's still in a vacuum, compare it to 7 dakkajets. Four Land Raiders can take'em.

Really? Four land raiders? Now that's a list that drop melta BA can actually dominate.

 Rismonite wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Even if they are in range first turn, which would be silly.

270 shots. 90 Hit. 45 Wound. 15 Dead Bikes from Shootas.
45 Shots. 15 Hit. 10 Wound. 3 Dead from Big Shootas.

18 Dead bikes.

Bikes move back 12", shoot 36. ~37 Boys die to return fire and the bikes jump out of range in the assault phase. Now they just keep out of your range for the rest of the game. Since they outrange you by 12".

It's still in a vacuum, compare it to 7 dakkajets. Four Land Raiders can take'em.

But four land raiders can't take the Fire Prism squadrons (capable of getting S10 AP1 shots at them) or Fire Dragons with a load of melta or Waithguard with Strength D shooting.

As for 7 dakkajets? It has AV10 doesn't it? So how is it gonna survive all that massed S6 shooting turning its way?

Or the Swooping Hawks who can haywire it is they move over it in the movement phase.

Four land raiders. Meet a single wraith knight.

Four land raiders. Meet any decent list commanded by a reasonably experienced commander. Land Raiders are bad. There's no way to dress them up as anything but bad.

 pretre wrote:
Four land raiders. Meet a single wraith knight.

RAMMING SPEED!

Luckly whats inside the landraider usually can handle the wraith knights

 Desubot wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Four land raiders. Meet a single wraith knight.

RAMMING SPEED!

Luckly whats inside the landraider usually can handle the wraith knights

HOw many points are we talking about here?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cause you can just screen the wk with all the bikes to prevent charge.

40 shots, 40/6 hit, 200/36 wound. 200/216 dead termies to over watch. Not good for the bikes. They get swept and the termies get shot to death.

 pretre wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Four land raiders. Meet a single wraith knight.

RAMMING SPEED!

Luckly whats inside the landraider usually can handle the wraith knights

HOw many points are we talking about here?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cause you can just screen the wk with all the bikes to prevent charge.

40 shots, 40/6 hit, 200/36 wound. 200/216 dead termies to over watch. Not good for the bikes. They get swept and the termies get shot to death.

Well 4 land raiders are 1k points. So 800ish for other things

Martel732 wrote:
Four land raiders. Meet any decent list commanded by a reasonably experienced commander. Land Raiders are bad. There's no way to dress them up as anything but bad.

I want to disagree with this, I want to think that really they're "relatively decent" units.

And against most of the later 6E/early7E armies, I'd say still they are.

But with the vastly expanded array of weapons, super-units, and the Necron and new Eldar books, and other such things having been hamfisted into 40k in the last year or so (and increasingly so in the last few months), it's apparent that they are, well, not "bad" but...just poorly positioned.

And I really don't think the issue is with the Land Raider in and of itself, but just the reality of the game where such a unit straddles the line of "too big & capable to really be made cheeper, too small to benefit from being a superheavy and too vulnerable to heavy anti-tank hardcounters". It also cant rely on target saturation like Leman Russ tanks often can because it's the clear big threat carrying another clear and big threat typically

Too much square peg-round hole.

Yeah, that's not good for the land raiders. 800 more points gets a wk and either wraith guard or some other D.

 raiden wrote:

 pretre wrote:

 Desubot wrote:

 pretre wrote:
Four land raiders. Meet a single wraith knight.

RAMMING SPEED!

Luckly whats inside the landraider usually can handle the wraith knights

HOw many points are we talking about here?


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Cause you can just screen the wk with all the bikes to prevent charge.

40 shots, 40/6 hit, 200/36 wound. 200/216 dead termies to over watch. Not good for the bikes. They get swept and the termies get shot to death.

Well 4 land raiders are 1k points. So 800ish for other things

So now the counter for 800-1000 points of bikes (~half of the Eldar army) is taking up the entire opposing army?

 Vaktathi wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Four land raiders. Meet any decent list commanded by a reasonably experienced commander. Land Raiders are bad. There's no way to dress them up as anything but bad.

I want to disagree with this, I want to think that really they're "relatively decent" units.

And against most of the later 6E/early7E armies, I'd say still they are.

But with the vastly expanded array of weapons, super-units, and the Necron and new Eldar books, and other such things having been hamfisted into 40k in the last year or so (and increasingly so in the last few months), it's apparent that they are, well, not "bad" but...just poorly positioned.

And I really don't think the issue is with the Land Raider in and of itself, but just the reality of the game where such a unit straddles the line of "too big & capable to really be made cheeper, too small to benefit from being a superheavy and too vulnerable to heavy anti-tank hardcounters". It also cant rely on target saturation like Leman Russ tanks often can because it's the clear big threat carrying another clear and big threat typically

Too much square peg-round hole.

I'm sticking with bad. Because nothing makes me HAPPIER than to see land raiders in the enemy list.

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


So now the counter for 800-1000 points of bikes (~half of the Eldar army) is taking up the entire opposing army?

Best way to win a gun fight is to bring two guns

 Desubot wrote:

 A Town Called Malus wrote:


So now the counter for 800-1000 points of bikes (~half of the Eldar army) is taking up the entire opposing army?

Best way to win a gun fight is to bring two guns

Wrong.you bring the right gun. 2 .50 cal rifles won't help you a bit if I've got a pistol 20ft away

Better is the guy that remembered to bring ammo

Gamgee wrote:
Jesus. What the hell. It seems the Eldar will continue to be the top dogs. Watch them not get a single nerf. The only possible cherry on top to make these situation worse. At this rate its going to be End Times Everyone vs Eldar.

Everyone Vs Eldar would be pretty interesting to see in Fluff actually... like The Eldar Take out the Emperor, which causes all of IOM to decide they must exterminate all Eldar. The Tyranid Hive fleet rolls on in seeing how much food is there (with all the armies clashing), The Necrons decide to take out an age old enemy for good, the Tau Etherals find out that the Eldar know their secrets and must die, and DE just say hey this seems cool and rips them a new one!

There is only war!!!!!!

 luky7dayz wrote:


There is only war!!!!!!

And Jetbikes.

 Vaktathi wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Four land raiders. Meet any decent list commanded by a reasonably experienced commander. Land Raiders are bad. There's no way to dress them up as anything but bad.

I want to disagree with this, I want to think that really they're "relatively decent" units.

And against most of the later 6E/early7E armies, I'd say still they are.

But with the vastly expanded array of weapons, super-units, and the Necron and new Eldar books, and other such things having been hamfisted into 40k in the last year or so (and increasingly so in the last few months), it's apparent that they are, well, not "bad" but...just poorly positioned.

And I really don't think the issue is with the Land Raider in and of itself, but just the reality of the game where such a unit straddles the line of "too big & capable to really be made cheeper, too small to benefit from being a superheavy and too vulnerable to heavy anti-tank hardcounters". It also cant rely on target saturation like Leman Russ tanks often can because it's the clear big threat carrying another clear and big threat typically

Too much square peg-round hole.

Land Raiders suck because basically every army has easily available means of killing them reliably. Imperials have melta, grav, and D. Eldar have melta and D. Nids have haywire. Necrons have Gauss. Tau have melta. And so on. You might occasionally catch someone off guard, but most of the time you're just handing them easy points.

Even if they never die, Land Raiders still suck That's how bad they are.

 DarkLink wrote:

 Vaktathi wrote:

Martel732 wrote:
Four land raiders. Meet any decent list commanded by a reasonably experienced commander. Land Raiders are bad. There's no way to dress them up as anything but bad.

I want to disagree with this, I want to think that really they're "relatively decent" units.

And against most of the later 6E/early7E armies, I'd say still they are.

But with the vastly expanded array of weapons, super-units, and the Necron and new Eldar books, and other such things having been hamfisted into 40k in the last year or so (and increasingly so in the last few months), it's apparent that they are, well, not "bad" but...just poorly positioned.

And I really don't think the issue is with the Land Raider in and of itself, but just the reality of the game where such a unit straddles the line of "too big & capable to really be made cheeper, too small to benefit from being a superheavy and too vulnerable to heavy anti-tank hardcounters". It also cant rely on target saturation like Leman Russ tanks often can because it's the clear big threat carrying another clear and big threat typically

Too much square peg-round hole.

Land Raiders suck because basically every army has easily available means of killing them reliably. Imperials have melta, grav, and D. Eldar have melta and D. Nids have haywire. Necrons have Gauss. Tau have melta. And so on. You might occasionally catch someone off guard, but most of the time you're just handing them easy points.

Goes back to the saturation thing. Leman Russ tanks work because in a 2k game you'll have two other AV14 vehicles and possibly a dozen other AV12 vehicles for an opponent to have to worry about. With a Land Raider, it's the clear cut priority target.

Martel732 wrote:
Even if they never die, Land Raiders still suck That's how bad they are.

I think you're being unfair there, Most games I've had where I've failed to kill an opponent's LR for some reason (it's happened), the Land Raider has made its presence felt, if for nothing else than sitting in the middle of the board throwing an assault cannon one way and a multi-melta the other

That's not enough dakka to matter in 7th ed. Not for 250 pts.

Oh and don't forget their amazing ability to immobilize themselves because they can't take dozer blades.

 Orock wrote:
Whelp, someone on warseer has the book. And its worse than I thought.

Wraithknights clocking in under 300 points.
jetbike stupidity confirmed.
str D everywhere (thought on wraiths, you get minus 1 to the d roll, so no 6 result possible)

interesting that things like banshees and shining spears get the +3 to charge distance like skitarii have. Must be a new thing they are gonna give to alot of assault units from here on out.

That's still really useful especially vs the new necrons and their RP bonuses. Str D everywhere!

I for one plan to hide in my Av 14 bunkers (that fortress of redemption is looking pretty promising) and have an army of AV 13 things like repressors and things. (hiding the side armor of course.)

Also thinking of getting achilles land raider with possible imperial bombards. ignore cover/armor higher strength to deny any FnP on Eldar anyways. I think pask may have himself a new tank here.

 DarkLink wrote:

Land Raiders suck because basically every army has easily available means of killing them reliably. Imperials have melta, grav, and D. Eldar have melta and D. Nids have haywire. Necrons have Gauss. Tau have melta. And so on. You might occasionally catch someone off guard, but most of the time you're just handing them easy points.

Essentially, this is the problem with every expensive vehicle. MCs are just better for the points. The only vehicles that are good are the ones that do decent damage, have good mobility, and are cheap -- like BA Razorbacks or drop pods. The exception being the Sicaran.

If vehicles and MCs were brought more to parity, imperial armies would get a big bump.